Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Obligatory and facilitative allelic variation in the DNA methylome within common disease-associated loci

Open access
Bell, Christopher G., Gao, Fei, Yuan, Wei, Roos, Leonie, Acton, Richard J., Xia, Yudong, Bell, Jordana, Ward, Kirsten, Mangino, Massimo, Hysi, Pirro G., Wang, Jun, Spector, Timothy D.·2018·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-017-01586-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Integrating epigenetic data with genome-wide association study (GWAS) results can reveal disease mechanisms. The genome sequence itself also shapes the epigenome, with CpG density and transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) strongly encoding the DNA methylome. Therefore, genetic polymorphism impacts on the observed epigenome. Furthermore, large genetic variants alter epigenetic signal dosage. Here, we identify DNA methylation variability between GWAS-SNP risk and non-risk haplotypes. In three subsets comprising 3128 MeDIP-seq peripheral-blood DNA methylomes, we find 7173 consistent and functionally enriched Differentially Methylated Regions. 36.8% can be attributed to common non-SNP genetic variants. CpG-SNPs, as well as facilitative TFBS-motifs, are also enriched. Highlighting their functional potential, CpG-SNPs strongly associate with allele-specific DNase-I hypersensitivity sites. Our results demonstrate strong DNA methylation allelic differences driven by obligatory or facilitative genetic effects, with potential direct or regional disease-related repercussions. These allelic variations require disentangling from pure tissue-specific modifications, may influence array studies, and imply underestimated population variability in current reference epigenomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-017-01586-1

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. Hoffman, M. M. et al. Integrative annotation of chromatin elements from ENCODE data. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, 827–841 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Gagliano Sarah, A. et al. Allele-skewed DNA modification in the brain: relevance to a schizophrenia GWAS. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 956–962 (2016). · DOI
  3. Do, C. et al. Mechanisms and disease associations of haplotype-dependent allele-specific DNA methylation. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 98, 934–955 (2016). · DOI
  4. Schaub, M. A., Boyle, A. P., Kundaje, A., Batzoglou, S. & Snyder, M. Linking disease associations with regulatory information in the human genome. Genome Res. 22, 1748–1759 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  5. Claussnitzer, M. et al. FTO obesity variant circuitry and adipocyte browning in humans. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 895–907 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Richards, E. J. Inherited epigenetic variation--revisiting soft inheritance. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7, 395–401 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  7. Bell, C. G. et al. Integrated genetic and epigenetic analysis identifies haplotype-specific methylation in the FTO type 2 diabetes and obesity susceptibility locus. PLOS ONE 5, e14040 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  8. Chen, L. et al. Genetic drivers of epigenetic and transcriptional variation in human immune cells. Cell 167, 1398–1414.e1324 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  9. Libertini, E. et al. Information recovery from low coverage whole-genome bisulfite sequencing. Nat. Commun. 7, 11306 (2016). · DOI
  10. Okitsu, C. Y. & Hsieh, C. L. Sensitivity and specificity of immunoprecipitation of DNA containing 5-Methylcytosine. BMC Res. Notes 8, 102 (2015). · DOI
  11. Wheeler, E. et al. Genome-wide SNP and CNV analysis identifies common and low-frequency variants associated with severe early-onset obesity. Nat. Genet. 45, 513–517 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Michailidou, K. et al. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat. Genet. 45, 353–361 (2013). 361e1–2. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Nam, R. K. et al. New variants at 10q26 and 15q21 are associated with aggressive prostate cancer in a genome-wide association study from a prostate biopsy screening cohort. Cancer Biol. Ther. 12, 997–1004 (2011). · DOI
  14. Barrett, J. H. et al. Genome-wide association study identifies three new melanoma susceptibility loci. Nat. Genet. 43, 1108–1113 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Tenesa, A. et al. Genome-wide association scan identifies a colorectal cancer susceptibility locus on 11q23 and replicates risk loci at 8q24 and 18q21. Nat. Genet. 40, 631–637 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Plenge, R. M. et al. Two independent alleles at 6q23 associated with risk of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat. Genet. 39, 1477–1482 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Schalkwyk, L. C. et al. Allelic skewing of DNA methylation is widespread across the genome. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 86, 196–212 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Gu, J. et al. Mapping of variable DNA methylation across multiple cell types defines a dynamic regulatory landscape of the HumanGenome. G3 (Bethesda) 6, 973–986 (2016). · DOI
  19. Bernstein, B. E. et al. An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489, 57–74 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Moyerbrailean, G. A. et al. Which genetics variants in DNase-seq footprints are more likely to alter binding? PLOS Genet. 12, e1005875 (2016). · DOI
  21. McClay, J. L. et al. High density methylation QTL analysis in human blood via next-generation sequencing of the methylated genomic DNA fraction. Genome Biol. 16, 291 (2015). · DOI
  22. Machanick, P. & Bailey, T. L. MEME-ChIP: motif analysis of large DNA datasets. Bioinformatics 27, 1696–1697 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  23. Gupta, S., Stamatoyannopoulos, J. A., Bailey, T. L. & Noble, W. S. Quantifying similarity between motifs. Genome Biol. 8, R24 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Bennett, E. A. et al. Active Alu retrotransposons in the human genome. Genome Res. 18, 1875–1883 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Leung, D. et al. Integrative analysis of haplotype-resolved epigenomes across human tissues. Nature 518, 350–354 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Ding, Z. et al. Quantitative genetics of CTCF binding reveal local sequence effects and different modes of X-chromosome association. PLOS Genet. 10, e1004798 (2014). · DOI
  27. Tang, Z. et al. CTCF-mediated human 3D genome architecture reveals chromatin topology for transcription. Cell 163, 1611–1627 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Tsankov, A. M. et al. Transcription factor binding dynamics during human ES cell differentiation. Nature 518, 344–349 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  29. Price, E. M. et al. Additional annotation enhances potential for biologically-relevant analysis of the Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450 BeadChip array. Epigenetics Chromatin 6, 1–15 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  30. Naeem, H. et al. Reducing the risk of false discovery enabling identification of biologically significant genome-wide methylation status using the HumanMethylation450 array. BMC Genomics 15, 51 (2014). · DOI
  31. Taudt, A., Colome-Tatche, M. & Johannes, F. Genetic sources of population epigenomic variation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 319–332 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  32. Liu, Y. et al. Epigenome-wide association data implicate DNA methylation as an intermediary of genetic risk in rheumatoid arthritis. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 142–147 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  33. van Dongen, J. et al. Genetic and environmental influences interact with age and sex in shaping the human methylome. Nat. Commun. 7, 11115 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Jaffe, A. E. et al. Mapping DNA methylation across development, genotype and schizophrenia in the human frontal cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 19, 40–47 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  35. Bell, C. G. et al. Novel regional age-associated DNA methylation changes within human common disease-associated loci. Genome Biol. 17, 193 (2016). · DOI
  36. Yanez-Cuna, J. O. et al. Dissection of thousands of cell type-specific enhancers identifies dinucleotide repeat motifs as general enhancer features. Genome Res. 24, 1147–1156 (2014). · DOI
  37. Gymrek, M. et al. Abundant contribution of short tandem repeats to gene expression variation in humans. Nat. Genet. 48, 22–29 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  38. Ward, M. C. et al. Latent regulatory potential of human-specific repetitive elements. Mol. Cell 12, 00944–00946 (2012).
  39. Grandi, F. C. et al. Retrotransposition creates sloping shores: a graded influence of hypomethylated CpG islands on flanking CpG sites. Genome Res. 25, 1135–1146 (2015). · DOI
  40. Speed, D., Cai, N., Johnson, M. R., Nejentsev, S. & Balding, D. J. Reevaluation of SNP heritability in complex human traits. Nat. Genet. 49, 986–992 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  41. Ragvin, A. et al. Long-range gene regulation links genomic type 2 diabetes and obesity risk regions to HHEX, SOX4, and IRX3. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 775–780 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  42. Yang, J. et al. FTO genotype is associated with phenotypic variability of body mass index. Nature 490, 267–272 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Paul, D. S. et al. Increased DNA methylation variability in type 1 diabetes across three immune effector cell types. Nat. Commun. 7, 13555 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  44. Andrews, S. V., Ladd-Acosta, C., Feinberg, A. P., Hansen, K. D. & Fallin, M. D. “Gap hunting” to characterize clustered probe signals in Illumina methylation array data. Epigenetics Chromatin 9, 56 (2016). · DOI
  45. Feber, A. et al. Using high-density DNA methylation arrays to profile copy number alterations. Genome Biol. 15, R30 (2014). · DOI
  46. Chavez, L. et al. Computational analysis of genome-wide DNA methylation during the differentiation of human embryonic stem cells along the endodermal lineage. Genome Res. 20, 1441–1450 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  47. Willems, T., Gymrek, M., Highnam, G., Mittelman, D. & Erlich, Y. The landscape of human STR variation. Genome Res. 24, 1894–1904 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  48. Gymrek, M. et al. Abundant contribution of short tandem repeats to gene expression variation in humans. Nat. Genet. 48, 22–29 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  49. Halachev, K., Bast, H., Albrecht, F., Lengauer, T. & Bock, C. EpiExplorer: live exploration and global analysis of large epigenomic datasets. Genome Biol. 13, R96 (2012). · DOI
  50. Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  51. Teschendorff, A. E. et al. A beta-mixture quantile normalization method for correcting probe design bias in Illumina Infinium 450 k DNA methylation data. Bioinformatics 29, 189–196 (2013). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 158

Metadata

Authors
Bell, C. G., Gao, F., Yuan, W., Roos, L., Acton, R. J., Xia, Y., Bell, J., Ward, K., Mangino, M., Hysi, P. G., Wang, J., & Spector, T. D.
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-01-02
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
8-8
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-017-01586-1
OpenAlex
W2777132446
Cited by
158
References
24
FWCI
6.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Obligatory and facilitative allelic variation in the DNA methylome within common disease-associated loci. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41467-017-01586-1
The paper
Bell, C. G., Gao, F., Yuan, W., Roos, L., Acton, R. J., Xia, Y., Bell, J., Ward, K., Mangino, M., Hysi, P. G., Wang, J., & Spector, T. D. (2018). Obligatory and facilitative allelic variation in the DNA methylome within common disease-associated loci. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01586-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.